OK Mr. Waite, let me know if the changes I've made to JEP-0023 address
your concerns. I added an open issues section as well as a sentence to the
second bullet under Section 1.
http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0023.html
Peter
--
Peter Saint-Andre
email+jabber: stpeter at jabber.org
weblog: http://www.saint-andre.com/blog/
On Tue, 7 May 2002, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> David Waite wrote:
>> ******
>> -1, I would like to see it explicitly stated that the TTL is only valid
> within a hop (e.g. TTL is not the total time to live for routing that
> goes between servers), and is only processed for delayed messages, such
> as offline messages.
>> ******
>> If I understand this paragraph correctly, you have two objections:
>> 1. The TTL does not represent the total time to live for routing of a
> chunk from the sender to the intended recipient, since multiple hops could
> be required. However, this would seem to require that each hop add its own
> TTL attribute in order to implement the functionality laid out in this
> JEP.
>> 2. Are you saying that the TTL *should* be processed only for delayed
> messages, that it *must* be processed only for delayed messages, or
> that right now it *is* processed only for delayed messages (i.e., in
> existing implementations)?
>> Peter
>> --
> Peter Saint-Andre
> email+jabber: stpeter at jabber.org> weblog: http://www.saint-andre.com/blog/>> _______________________________________________
> Council mailing list
>Council at jabber.org>http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/council>